this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
31 points (91.9% liked)

Selfhosted

40173 readers
592 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I have a decent amount of video footage that I'd like to share with friends and family. My first thought was Youtube, but this is all home videos that I really don't want to share publicly.

A large portion of my video footage is 4k/60, so I'm ideally looking for a solution where I can send somebody a link, and it gives a "similar to Youtube" experience when they click on the link. And by "similar to Youtube," I mean that the player automatically adjusts the video bitrate and resolution based on their internet speed. Trying to explain to extended family how to lower the bitrate if the video starts buffering isn't really an option. It needs to "just work" as soon as the link is clicked; some of the individuals I'd like to share video with are very much not technically inclined.

I'd like to host it on my homelab, but my internet connection only has a 4Mbit upload, which is orders of magnitude lower than my video bitrate, so I'm assuming I would need to either use a 3rd-party video hosting service or set up a VPS with my hosting software of choice.

Any suggestions? I prefer open-source self-hosted software, but I'm willing to pay for convenience.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (9 children)

Maybe Jellyfin, where I believe you can force a low bitrate for every remote client. It wouldn't be "adjust to internet speed" but you could minimise buffering that way.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Note that for jellyfin (or any software) to reduce the bitrate it will have to transcode the video

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Of course. Youtube and the like "pre-transcode" it so that would be one way for Jellyfin to better solve it, at the cost of a significant amount of disk space.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

You can get an intel arc a310 for ~$90 and it has absolutely insane transcode performance, so depending on how large your library is it might even end up cheaper than buying more storage to just live-transcode everything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Or if you have a 7th gen or newer Intel CPU with integrated graphics, those work great too. Support for 10 bit does require a later model CPU though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I suspect the delay would still be longer than a Youtube like implementation which may need to switch transcodes multiple times, but that's probably unrealistic at this point anyway.

Transcoding everything to AV1 could be a solution too, since high resolutions can look quite good at low bitrates, so you could limit it to 5mbps or 10mbps for any resolution and be done with it. But I'm not sure Jellyfin supports that, and at least from the UI it doesn't give you particularly fine grained control over resolution/bitrates. Perhaps having a secondary library of just AV1 transcodes that you handle manually (perhaps even using a software encoder) could be an option for some.

The client side is also an issue, with not that many devices supporting hardware decoding (although I've found it's fast enough in software with most modern smartphones at least).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

if you're switching between formats yeah it's going to need to start over on the transcoding. If you don't it's actually better because it just caches it on disk. From that point it's basically native.

Jellyfin does support limiting external network speeds, and individual client speeds, so if you setup your transcoding correctly, and the clients support those codecs, it'll work.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)